On 5/10/06, Joe Germuska <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
At 11:21 AM -0700 5/10/06, Wendy Smoak wrote:
>On 5/10/06, Joe Germuska <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>>This seems like the smallest of things, but the distribution includes
>>struts-core-1.3.4.jar and not struts-action-1.3.4.jar.
>>
>>I thought we'd decided to change that? The upgrade notes wiki page
>>refers to struts-action:
>>http://wiki.apache.org/struts/StrutsUpgradeNotes12to13
>
>We decided to call the entire subproject "Struts Action" (rather than
>Struts Core or Struts Classic).
>
>That individual artifactId was changed back to struts-core during the
>Maven reorganization. I'm fairly sure I mentioned it on the list, but
>I'm having trouble finding messages that talk about struts-core and
>struts-action among all the commit messages in the archives.
>
>In summary, struts-core.jar contains the core of the Action framework.
>Eventually, I would like to have a 'struts-action.jar' that contains
>the _entire_ framework, the equivalent of 'struts.jar' from the 1.2
>branch, or the Spring framework's full 'spring.jar'.
I'm fine on this -- in fact, I think that "struts-action" implies
what you described, and it's better to keep what's now known as
"struts-core" from "usurping" that name!
>Can I count you as +1, or does this need further discussion?
+1 GA
But I just noticed something else; for some reason the registration
of the Tiles 1.1 DTD was removed, even though I don't know of
anything that makes Tiles unable to function if one has a
valid-according-to-that-DTD tiles-definitions.xml.
I missed the discussion where the 1.3 dtd was added - seems like its
actually identical to the 1.1 dtd - which IMO serves no purpose. I
would rather it was removed.
Given that at this moment we appear to be having systems problems
with apache.org machines, this is annoying; is there any reason not
to restore that registration? The 1.1 DTD is included in the JAR;
it's just not registered in XmlParser.
Since only the new identical 1.3 dtd is registered, looks like were
going to force any tiles users whose apps don't have www access into
an unecessary upgrade. For those with www access who don't upgrade,
its going to mean more load on the Apache servers.
I don't think this qualifies as a reason not to grant GA status.
Maybe not, but it doesn't make us look v.smart when we explain that
"...there isn't anything new/changed in the 1.3 dtd, but you should
upgrade, otherwise it won't use the local copy in the jar".
Niall
Joe
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
